Gamespot just posted a story giving the full rundown of everything we know about the Revolution thusfar. It goes over pricing and expandability (Two SD Card slots and two USB slots?!) and backwards compatability issues (controllers, memory cards, etc)

Check it out...good read. It makes me want to buy a Revo much more now.

The only Revolutionary thing about the Rev is the controller.And we haven't even seen a single screenshot or read any real hands-on impressions with the hardware. Because, well...nobody has final devkits yet. Which is alarming, because the launch will probably only see 1 or 2 titles which will make very good use of the new controls (both made by Nintendo themselves ofcourse) and the 3rd party stuff will be gimmicky and useless like most first gen DS software. Not to mention many games looking like games from this generation, because of the Rev's low power compared to the other systems. I've read that Xbox's graphics would be a good target for how Rev games will look....Xbox 1 that is...

I'll buy a Rev when it comes out, but only as a second system next to the PS3. Because even though the controls will be revolutionary, in terms of hardware, it's not much better than this generation.

The PS3 with all it's new technology will be the only new system that will feel truly next-gen. The Cell processor and blue-ray will make all the difference.

The devkits for the Revolution sound finalized enough to develop games just fine, and I'm sure developers familiar with the XBox and the GC will have a good enough time gauging just how to utilize the system's power. Even if they don't pull it off, no biggie. There's rarely great titles out at launch that'd be remembered past the launch anyways, save for a title or two.

Also, personally while the X360 games look a fuckload better than the XBox games, it doesn't really feel like it's much different. I imagine that while there'll be a more dramatic difference between the PS2 and PS3, that same feeling will ultimately resurface - the controller is how you interact with the game world, and that will indeed be where the 'revolution' will be, supposing they succeed.

Of course, we wouldn't be having this conversation if you weren't hellbent on dragging how much better you think Sony is into every damn conversation involving this and related topics.

Everything I've seen so far on the Xbox 360 looks like the same old game, but with better graphics. It can still have good games (man do I want Oblivion), but I was sick of war FPS's at least five years ago, simply putting better graphics on them isn't going to make me want to play them.

The PS3 will no doubt have fantastic graphics and everything, but the games are still going to be pretty much the same, bar those made by creative developers (Katamari Damacy and Shadow of the Colossus spring to mind). Some will still be good, but once the 'lol prety' wears off it'll just be same old same old. I'm already finding myself not very motivated to play games that much these days, and neither Sony or Microsoft are doing anything to change that.

Nintendo however, are. The Revolution so far is sounding great, because it's doing something new. At least half the games are going to feel fresh just because we'll interact with them differently. No doubt some will be gimmicky crap, but every system has it's shit games. I don't care if the graphics are only going to be Xbox 1 quality (although I don't know where you heard that). Last I checked, the Xbox had some pretty damn good graphics.

Katamari Damacy springs to mind again. The graphics were fairly low quality, but the game was innovative and fun, so it didn't matter.

I'm far from a graphics fanboy, but graphics can matter to a certain extent. Take a game like Oblivion, for example - even if the core gameplay is enough to make the game very good, a lot of the immersion factor would be lost if the game didn't have so realistic and awe-inspiring graphics. Beefed up hardware also allows the developers to make games that are bigger, have less loading times and so on. So yes, even if it's just "more of the same" it does help the overall experience of a game. More powerful hardware will also enable devlopers to try out ideas that just weren't possible on earlier systems, because they required too much processing power. Compare GRAW on the Xbox360 with GRAW on the Xbox, for an example.

With that said, I'm extremely excited about the Revolution. I'm a little worried about how well the controller will work for extended play sessions (I can see players getting tired in the arms after waving that around for too long), but possibilites for new and innovative game concepts are staggering.

The only Revolutionary thing about the Rev is the controller.And we haven't even seen a single screenshot or read any real hands-on impressions with the hardware. Because, well...nobody has final devkits yet. Which is alarming, because the launch will probably only see 1 or 2 titles which will make very good use of the new controls (both made by Nintendo themselves ofcourse) and the 3rd party stuff will be gimmicky and useless like most first gen DS software. Not to mention many games looking like games from this generation, because of the Rev's low power compared to the other systems. I've read that Xbox's graphics would be a good target for how Rev games will look....Xbox 1 that is...

I'll buy a Rev when it comes out, but only as a second system next to the PS3. Because even though the controls will be revolutionary, in terms of hardware, it's not much better than this generation.

The PS3 with all it's new technology will be the only new system that will feel truly next-gen. The Cell processor and blue-ray will make all the difference.

I am just gonna say fuck you and leave it at that. Douche bag

Logged

All right, we are going to use a fan brush here and uh why don't you take some hunter green and we are going to put a happy little bush right down over here in the corner there and that'll just be our little secret and if you tell anyone that that bush is there I will come to your house and I will cut you.

I'm far from a graphics fanboy, but graphics can matter to a certain extent. Take a game like Oblivion, for example - even if the core gameplay is enough to make the game very good, a lot of the immersion factor would be lost if the game didn't have so realistic and awe-inspiring graphics

I can't discount them entirely, I'm aware of that; some games just wouldn't be the same or even possible with weaker hardware. But to say that better graphics outweigh a weaker system with a totally new method of controlling games, even though said weaker system should still pack one helluva punch? It's also worth noting that the GC's apparantly technically the weakest system of the 3 of the current/last generation... Yet it produced RE4, and that couldn't even be ported without some compromises to the PS2.

Of course, Vagrant went and made a joke out of himself, so maybe this should just be dropped since he's said he won't be posting again. :P